Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: CottShop
you know

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal."

If you had said "surely you know" or "you must know" it would have been o.k.

544 posted on 02/04/2009 9:57:10 AM PST by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies ]


To: Religion Moderator

Religion moderator- I said that because I KNOW I have told him this MANY MANY times here on FR- I am NOT reading his mind- I am stating FACT- You sir/maam have presumed to read MY mind and have presmed ot make htis personal against ME! JS KNOWS these things, but refuses to acknowledge them or address them preferring to constantly fiegn ignorance! I have explained these positions to him personally many many times, as well as several other posters here on FR EVERY TIME they bring their ‘counter=-arguments’ to hte table- so don’t infer that I am doing somethign i am NOT


545 posted on 02/04/2009 10:25:25 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies ]

To: Religion Moderator

This conversation is goign along quite civilly, and htere is no need for it being itnerrupted by a moderator accusing me of somethign I am not doing. JS PRESSUMED to read my intentions, yet you remained silent on the occassion? Yet you felt you needed to step in when I stated a FACT that JS knows full well what I posted Because I have told him this many many times? I am NOT inferrign anythign that is untrue like JS did to me, and hwich you conveniently ignored apparently for fear of offending those that think evolution is fact, but I note you’re not averse to offending htose that beleive in Creationism by trumping up a false charge agasianst them? When you have evidnece that I have pressumed ot unfairly ‘read someone’s mind’ by makign claims that aren’t true- then you let me know- till then, how about not jumping in and making false accusations? I stated a FACT- He DOES know full well because I PERSONALLY have told him this many times! How about looking for ligitimate things to gripe about instead of inventing some?


546 posted on 02/04/2009 10:35:35 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies ]

To: Religion Moderator

Wooops mod- You’ve missed a number of posts i nthis htread that have done exactly what you falsely accused me of doing- I see you decided to also biasedly nuke my posts which called you out for doing exactly what you accused me of falsely doing- Well done- keep up the hypocrisy so htese threads go accordign to your master plan! you’d also better have me banned, because I’m just goign to keep exposing your hypocritical trumped up charges.

Betty Boop AlamoGirl- The mod took it upon themself to nuke my post apologizing to you for engagin in the mods derailment attempts when htey attempted to exhert hteir will on this thread by trumping up a charge against me by presuming to make it personal by reading my mind and presuming to know my intent for calling JS out for feigning ingornace on KINDS and Baraminology when I’ve PERSONALLY told him many many times, and so have personal knowledge that JS DOES infact know full well- This mod is a FACT, it is NOT ‘reading his mind’.

mod, you and JS can play your little miss innocent routines all you like, and you can keep nuking my posts to hide hte fact that you were wrong for stepping in and making a mountain out of an issue where no moutnain existed, nor was there one called for- but you took it upon yourself to direct the thread i nthe direction you wished, and you can continue subjectively ignoring others in htis htread who DID infact assume to read others minds, and hwo DID infact ‘make it personal’ many times in past posts all you like- but if you’re NOT goign to objectively enforce the ‘rules’, then I’m goign to keep exposing your uncalled for subjectivity in these htese threads.

If you wish to apologize publicly for screwing up, and wish to go back through each post and objectively nuke those posts that ‘made it personal’, then I’ll accept your apology- but if you just wish to keep subjectively controlling how htis htread goes, and wish to keep subjectively nuking posts you don’t like while subjectively allowing others to do the exact think you falsely accused me of doing- then by golly you’d better have me banned- because I’m not goign to put up with that CRAP. JS DOES know full because and I know this for a FACt because I PERSONALLY have told him many many times- I stand by my post, and if you don’t like me calling him on it- then you’d better either have me banned, or continue your basied nikings- but don’t expect me to just let you get away with that crap without exposing oyu for it! If you wish to control these threads in such a manner that suits your fancy- then you’re going to have a long day ahead of you unless you have me banned- which is fien by me- I’ll not put up with your crap subjective moderation.


562 posted on 02/05/2009 11:14:21 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson